Protest denied regarding run-off; new council takes office
Scott Csernyik
1/3/2006 12:00:00 AM
Results from the Saginaw Chippewa Tribe's second runoff election will stand.
Election Appeals Judge Vanya S. Hogen denied the protest filed by Jeanette Leaureaux, Delores Jackson and Patricia Peters in a Dec. 27 ruling.
On Dec. 29, the new Tribal Council was slated to be sworn in. Because of holiday deadlines and press schedules, the Tribe's new executive council-including chief-will be detailed in the Jan. 16 edition of the Tribal Observer.
"In the present case, the winning candidate, Lorna Call, received seven votes more than the losing candidate, Jeanette Leaureaux," stated Hogen in her opinion. "That means that to prevail, the protesters would have had to prove by clear and convincing evidence that some violation of election procedures occurred, and that as a result, seven or more votes would have been cast for Ms. Leaureaux or would not have been cast for Ms. Call."
The trio's protest, filed on Dec. 20, alleged that incarcerated Tribal members did not receive their absentee ballots until the date of the election-Dec. 15.
"Incarcerated Tribal member voters could not return absentee ballots by the close of voting on Dec. 15, as they only received then [sic] that day, effectively disenfranchising them, and such action materially affected the outcome of the election," according to the protest. "The Election Caucus Committee's process of mailing out the applications for absentee ballots and then the absentee ballots and holding the election on Dec. 15, 2005, a Thursday, only one week after the order requiring a new election rather than holding the election the following Tuesday, did not give voters adequate notice of the run-off election and made the receipt and return of the absentee ballots a logistical impossibility."
But Hogen disagreed.
"It is true that the second run-off election was held on a very tight timeline," she wrote. "The Caucus Committee took extraordinary steps to notify voters of the second runoff...Voter turnout for the second runoff election was significantly higher than the first run-off election (351 to 285)...The protesters argued that the Caucus Committee's decision to mail absentee ballot applications to all Tribal members rather than delivering them to any potential voters had a disparate impact on the Isabella County Jail inmates, because they likely did not receive their applications in the mail. Of course, the same could have been true for college students, those in the military, or those who simply happened to be out of town for the week of Dec. 8-15."
Through findings of fact, it was determined the "Tribal Clerk did not receive any completed applications for absentee ballots requesting that the actual ballot be mailed to the Isabella County Jail."
It was also stated in the decision that four Tribal members incarcerated at the Isabella County Jail signed identical affidavits indicating that they were unable to vote in the second run-off election because there was insufficient time to complete and return both the absentee ballot application and the absentee ballot by the date of the election.
"In addition to failing to demonstrate that any violation of election procedures had occurred, the protesters failed to prove that what they alleged was a violation (not hand-delivering absentee ballots to inmates) had an actual and material effect on the election," stated Hogen. "The protesters provided no evidence that even one more person would have voted for Ms. Leaureaux if ballots had been hand-delivered to the Isabella County Jail inmates. Their protest, therefore, is denied."